First, happy holidays, Dunlapsa and everyone.
Second. Dunlapsa, I share the frustration you express in your first paragraph. I just think Ken Wilber needs a ruthless editor. Someone who will untangle his endless, impacted run-on sentences, and force the presentation of his ideas into a more linear, logical sequence, and above all prune those impacted redundancies that scatter the attention of the hard-working reader.
My working theory is that KW sees his whole thought system as one holographic entity, all parts equally present in each. Which is maybe the way these things work in the higher dimensions KW inhabits. But when presenting such though systems in writing for the rest of us, it would REALLY REALLY help if KW, or he plus a ruthless editor, translated this into a linear sequence that builds on itself one logical step at a time, minus the confusing redundancies.
I’ve been reading KW’s books as they have been published ever since 1982. Which is perhaps a kinder, gentler way of assimilating his thought structures. And while I often feel exactly the frustration you do, Dunlapsa, it’s always, always been worth the effort.
Let me present the other side: the AQAL synthesis is one of the greatest achievements of our species (IMHO). It has certainly been one of the best things that ever happened to me, hard as I’ve had to work to assimilate it. I am a much happier, more together human being today than I’d have been without its guiding orientation.
I can imagine another side to this. KW has so much to present that it is a better use of his time to publish something that isn’t fully polished – something that most other writers would not consider a final draft – so that he can hurry on to his next work-in-progress.
And let me echo Corey deVos. “Boomeritis” is a lot of fun and an excellent additional onramp to KW’s mental universe. Those last thirty pages are worth the long slog through all that critique of rancid Green.
Also, with great respect to Corey, I prefer “A Theory Of Everything” to “A Brief History Of Everything.” Probably just a quirk of mine, but I generally find the Q&A format a bit off-putting. Both these books are good onramps to the fullness of AQAL theory. Maybe read both? Then move on to SES, if you want to take on board AQAL theory in its fulness, or else move on to one of the other books Corey recommended depending on your main interest?
My favorite early work of KW’s is “Up From Eden,” probably because I’m a historian by training.
And finally, welcome to our merry band!